Partly allowed

Ashok Tiwari v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC21 Mar 2023Cr.Rev./631/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision, the High Court of Jharkhand addressed a case where the petitioner faced a nearly 30-year trial. The court set aside a nine-month prison sentence for violating the Bihar Kendu Leaves Act, substituting it with a one-year fine, citing excessive delay and rigors of the trial.

What did the court decide?

Order setting aside the simple imprisonment of nine months and sentencing the petitioner to a fine of ₹1,000/-.

Ashok Tiwari Vs State of Jharkhand — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. Revision. No. 631 of 2007

¶3

¶4

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶5

¶6

For the Petitioner : M/s. Syed Ramiz Zafar, Advocate For the State : M/s. A. K. Dey, A.P.P

¶7

¶8

08/21.03.2023 The petitioner has filed this application against the judgment 04.05.2007 passed by Sri Arun Kumar Gupta No. 1, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, in Criminal Appeal Number 144/2004, whereby and wherein the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.08.2004 passed by Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned J.M.F.C. Palamau at Daltonganj in C. F. Case Number 463 /1992, holding the petitioner guilty of offence under section 16 of the Bihar Kendu Leaves (Control of Trade) Act and thereby sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 09 months.

¶9

Learned lawyer appearing for the petitioner at the very outset submitted that the offence is of the year 1992 and the petitioner has faced rigors of the trial for about 29 years and as such the sentence passed by the learned court below of simple imprisonment for 9 months under section 16 of the Bihar Kendu Leaves (Control of Trade) Act to be converted into fine.

¶10

The petitioner was apprehended by the informant party on 26.11.1992, while he was travelling on a truck bearing registration number BE-Z-4555 loaded with Kendu leaves which was in violation of sections 9/12/14/16 of the Bihar Kendu Leaves (Control of Trade) Act and is punishable under section 16 of the said Act.

¶11

In order to prove its case, the prosecution has adduced both oral and documentary evidence. The informant Jai Kumar

¶12

Mishra has been examined as P.W.2, he has supported the allegation as made out in the official complaint and has stated that on 26/11/1992 at about 09:30 A.M, a truck bearing registration no BEZ-4555 loaded with Kendu Leaves was seized. The petitioner was apprehended while travelling on the seized truck. He has proved the seizure list which has been marked as Ext.- 4. He has identified the petitioner in the dock.

¶13

Basudeo Mali P.W.1, Subedar Singh P.W.3, Rajendra Mahato P.W.4, all of them have supported the prosecution case and have corroborated the statement of the informant Jai Kumar Mishra P.W.2 and has stated that on 26.11.1992 at about 9:30 A.M., truck bearing registration number BE-Z-4555 was seized which was loaded with Kendu Leaves and the petitioner was found travelling on the said truck.

¶14

Rajendra Mahato P.W.4 has proved the seizure list which has been marked as Ext.- 4. From the perusal of the seizure list, it appears that on 26.11.1992 at about 9:30 A.M. the informant party seized a truck bearing registration number BE-Z-4555 loaded with Kendu Leaves. The copy of the seizure list was handed over to the petitioner.

¶15

All the aforesaid witnesses have been cross-examined at length, there is nothing in their cross-examination to doubt there veracity.

¶16

From the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the petitioner beyond all reasonable doubt and the learned court below has rightly held him guilty.

¶17

It is evident that the petitioner has undergone rigors of trial for about 30 years. Section 16 of the Bihar Kendu Leaves (Control of Trade) Act prescribes for a punishment which may extend to one year or with fine or with both.

¶18

There is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner has earlier been convicted in any other offence and as such the sentence of simple imprisonment for 9 months is set aside.

¶19

The petitioner is sentenced to pay a fine of ₹1,000/- for the offence under section 16 of the Bihar Kendu Leaves (Control of Trade) Act within one month from the date of receipt of this order by the learned trial court and in default of payment of fine the petitioner shall further undergo simple imprisonment for 1 month.

¶20

This appeal is partly allowed with the modification of the sentence.

¶21

Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.

¶22

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

¶23

Saurabh/-

Ashok Tiwari v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Tiwari v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saddam Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Haji MD Safik Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukesh Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shrawan Chouhan Vs State of Jharkhand

Parmeshwar Ravidas Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dev Nath Munda Alias Deva Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand